Who's Watching Cache Pages?

[Fledermaus]

With regards to the following statement found on every geocache page:

 

" X user(s) watching this cache."

 

Why is it necessary for GC to maintain the "secrecy" of who is watching any particular geocache page?

 

Furthormore, I have have no quams about knowing who is watching my geocache pages. Do you?

 

Perhaps an "option" to this "secrecy" should be made available to cache owner and not to the watcher.

 

/\/(°w°)\/\

[+Bunganator]

The watch feature isnt for the cache owners personal satisfaction, its simply so that cachers can get notifications of activity. As an owner, it would be interesting to know who is watching, but some cachers don't want others to know, especially when it comes to FTFs. Other than that, why would it matter to the cache owner? It isnt necessarily about "secrecy," its more about privacy for lack of a better word. As a finder, I don't feel like its another persons business to reveal what I am watching. Im not saying that I feel violated, but that is like hanging someones name on a bathroom stall while they are in there. You just dont do it. Just be happy people are watching it. Watching often leads to finds.

Edited February 3, 2008 by Bunganator

[geode hunter]

I used to have a series of premium members only caches and there was a way to who had visited the cache page. it was very interesting to see how far out the information got to. I am guessing the ability still exist.

 

I have often wondered who was watching some of my pages. I feel honored they are and sometimes would like to ask questions about how to improve a cache without using the cache page as a mini forum.

 

Here is a thought. a non public / non shared bookmark will do the same thing as anonymously watching a page and does not show up in the stats on the page. nobody will ever know you are there. Then let the owner know who is just watching the page. this may help in fine tuning the page and cache.

[+paleolith]

Why is it necessary for GC to maintain the "secrecy" of who is watching any particular geocache page?

The more appropriate question is, why would it be worth the programming cost and server load to provide this information? What's it worth? If you really think it has value to you, explain why -- provide justificaiton for your request. It's not something they intentionally turned off, it's just something they haven't ever implemented.

 

In any case, just showing the watch list won't tell you who is getting notifications on the cache. I'm probably watching a hundred caches, and only about a dozen are on my watch list. I'm watching the rest via bookmark lists. Those don't show on the watch count on the cache page. Showing that count, and retrieving all the IDs from all the bookmark lists, would be more programming and more server load.

 

Finally, remember that for old caches, probably 3/4 of those watching are no longer getting email at the address on record with gc.com. gc.com doesn't purge members just because they don't log in. So the count is suspect at best, and the list would be even more suspect.

 

Edward

[+tomturtle]

I sometimes watch caches that I had trouble with, hoping to pick up a clue in someone else's logs. I wouldn't want the fact that I was watching it to be public. Sure, I could check in on the cache page once in a while, but then I would miss the logs that the owner later deleted. I'm in favor of keeping who's watching a secret.

[geode hunter]

Just checked on some of our premium members only caches and you can still read "audit logs" and check out who has been looking at your cache page. It gives the cacher name, first day and last day viewed and how many times they have opened the page. The watch list is still secret though. Seems like enough info.

[+TexasGringo]

***The more appropriate question is, why would it be worth the programming cost and server load to provide this information?***

 

There must already be some program code that looks to see how many others are looking at your cache...and then reporting that to you.

[+TexasGringo]

***It isnt necessarily about "secrecy," its more about privacy for lack of a better word***

 

and

 

*** don't feel like its another persons business to reveal what I am watching.***

 

But yet I can click on your profiles and see what caches you did, what you hid and any pictures you took....so the Privacy stuff does not fly.

Edited February 3, 2008 by Drooling_Mongoloid

[Mr.Yuck]

***The more appropriate question is, why would it be worth the programming cost and server load to provide this information?***

 

There must already be some program code that looks to see how many others are looking at your cache...and then reporting that to you.

 

Navicache tells you not only how many, but who as well. And it's not exactly what I'd call a super high-tech website.

 

If TPTB were concerned about privacy, they'd get rid of those durned Audit logs on MOC's. I was just screwing around surfing Geocaching google maps once, and I apparently looked at an MOC in California (I'm from N.Y.) You can't even tell you're clicking on an MOC from the maps. The owner emailed me, and asked me why I looked at their cache. I thought that was pretty bizarre. Can I surf the freaking web, if you don't mind?

Edited February 3, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+paleolith]

***The more appropriate question is, why would it be worth the programming cost and server load to provide this information?***

 

There must already be some program code that looks to see how many others are looking at your cache...and then reporting that to you.

Literally true, yes. But it's probably optimized to store the number of watchers in the cache record so that it doesn't require an extra lookup to display the cache page.

 

More specifically: yes, there has to be a table (using SQL terminology) relating caches to watchers. But you don't want to be doing a lookup, counting all records in that table related to a given cache, every time you display the cache. So every time you update the watchlist table, you adjust the count in the cache record. This is extra work when the watchlist is updated, but displaying a cache page is probably at least 100 times more frequent than adding or deleting it from a user's watch list (and quite possibly 1000 times more frequent), so you do the extra work during a watchlist update rather than during a query.

 

And yes, of course you can always look up the list of watchers (as opposed to just the number). You have to do that to send them email when the cache is logged. It's a reasonably efficient operation (although my guess is that for notifications, it is NOT done in real time, but rather the cache is put on a "to notify" list and the notification operation is done on a time-available basis). But it still takes significant web design and programming work to create the page to show the watch list and to integrate it into the owner version of the cache page. Given that it probably only shows 10% of the users getting notifications on the cache, and that perhaps half of the ones it shows aren't really receiving the notifications, what's the value?

 

That's why I say that a request needs to be justified with a description of the value. This is standard procedure for requesting new features in software. In this case, the cost is not enormous but is still significant, and the value is not obvious at all.

 

Edward

[+Prime Suspect]

With regards to the following statement found on every geocache page:

 

" X user(s) watching this cache."

 

Why is it necessary for GC to maintain the "secrecy" of who is watching any particular geocache page?

 

Furthormore, I have have no quams about knowing who is watching my geocache pages. Do you?

 

Perhaps an "option" to this "secrecy" should be made available to cache owner and not to the watcher.

 

/\/(°w°)\/\

One good reason is that people will try to use it as a list of people to accuse, if their cache goes missing.

 

That's just one of several good reasons not to reveal watchers. To date, I have yet to hear a single good reason to reveal them. I don't consider curiosity to be a good reason.

[Neos2]

One good reason is that people will try to use it as a list of people to accuse, if their cache goes missing.

 

That's just one of several good reasons not to reveal watchers. To date, I have yet to hear a single good reason to reveal them. I don't consider curiosity to be a good reason.

Although, if you are just curious, you might try posting a note to the cache page, asking the folks who are watching to please send you a note telling them why they decided to watch the page.

 

I've had a couple of caches that had several watchers, in spite of the fact that the caches weren't anything all that special. I mean, they were mine, so of course I thought they were nice enough, but.... well, they weren't particularly difficult and they didn't get amazing logs or lots of photos. I always wondered why they had so many watchers. I was never curious enough to ask folks to fess up, though.

Edited February 4, 2008 by Neos2

[+TexasGringo]

***One good reason is that people will try to use it as a list of people to accuse, if their cache goes missing.***

 

Thats a good reason? Hahahahaha

 

Why would someone watch the cache just to rob it?

Edited February 4, 2008 by Drooling_Mongoloid

[Mr.Yuck]

With regards to the following statement found on every geocache page:

 

" X user(s) watching this cache."

 

Why is it necessary for GC to maintain the "secrecy" of who is watching any particular geocache page?

 

Furthormore, I have have no quams about knowing who is watching my geocache pages. Do you?

 

Perhaps an "option" to this "secrecy" should be made available to cache owner and not to the watcher.

 

/\/(°w°)\/\

One good reason is that people will try to use it as a list of people to accuse, if their cache goes missing.

 

That's just one of several good reasons not to reveal watchers. To date, I have yet to hear a single good reason to reveal them. I don't consider curiosity to be a good reason.

 

Well, I'm sort of local to the OP of the "list of people to accuse" thread, and I can say the locals there are at their wits end with a cache thief that's been active for several years.

 

I agree with Prime Suspect, but I'm really rather confused with TPTB apparently not wanting to reveal the watchers of caches for privacy reasons, but yet having Audit logs for MOC's. Reference my post #9 in this thread. Why the hell am I receiving emails in my inbox from people asking me why I looked at their cache, after they painstakenly investigate my profile, after seeing that I viewed their cache once whilst surfing Google maps?

[geode hunter]

emails in my inbox from people asking me why I looked at their cache, after they painstakenly investigate my profile, after seeing that I viewed their cache once whilst surfing Google maps?

 

maybe they never met a new yorker and thought this might be a chance to see one in person.

[Mr.Yuck]

emails in my inbox from people asking me why I looked at their cache, after they painstakenly investigate my profile, after seeing that I viewed their cache once whilst surfing Google maps?

 

maybe they never met a new yorker and thought this might be a chance to see one in person.

 

Naw, I'm from Upstate. Way Upstate. I'm as boring as any Mid-Westerner.

[+Prime Suspect]

***One good reason is that people will try to use it as a list of people to accuse, if their cache goes missing.***

 

Thats a good reason? Hahahahaha

 

Why would someone watch the cache just to rob it?

You misunderstood my message. I said it's a good reason to not list who's watching a cache, because there are people who will use it to start a witch-hunt. I never said these were smart people. But they are out there. And that's why it is, as I said, a good reason.